The Google JavaScript Style Guide is the basis for our coding style, with additional guidance here where that style guide is not aligned with ES6 or TypeScript.
Comments that explain what some block of code does are nice; they can tell you something in less time than it would take to follow through the code itself.
Comments that explain why some block of code exists at all, or does something the way it does, are invaluable. The "why" is difficult, or sometimes impossible, to track down without seeking out the original author. When collaborators are in the same room, this hurts productivity. When collaborators are in different timezones, this can be devastating to productivity.
For example, this is a not-very-useful comment:
// Set default tabindex.
if (!$attrs['tabindex']) {
$element.attr('tabindex', '-1');
}
While this is much more useful:
// Unless the user specifies so, the calendar should not be a tab stop.
// This is necessary because ngAria might add a tabindex to anything with an ng-model
// (based on whether or not the user has turned that particular feature on/off).
if (!$attrs['tabindex']) {
$element.attr('tabindex', '-1');
}
For example, rather than doing this:
<md-button>Basic button</md-button>
<md-button class="md-fab">FAB</md-button>
<md-button class="md-icon-button">pony</md-button>
do this:
<md-button>Basic button</md-button>
<md-fab>FAB</md-fab>
<md-icon-button>pony</md-icon-button>
Keeping modules to a single responsibility makes the code easier to test, consume, and maintain. ES6 modules offer a straightforward way to organize code into logical, granular units. Ideally, individual files are 200 - 300 lines of code.
Once a feature is released, it never goes away. We should avoid adding features that don't offer high user value for price we pay both in maintenance, complexity, and payload size. When in doubt, leave it out.
This applies especially so to providing two different APIs to accomplish the same thing. Always prefer sticking to a single API for accomplishing something.
For functions that are more complicated than a simple getter/setter, provide at least a brief sentence explaining what the function does and/or why it does something.
- The baseline calculation for flex elements is different than other display values, making it difficult to align flex elements with standard elements like input and button.
- Component outermost elements are never flex (block or inline-block)
- Don't use
display: flex
on elements that will contain projected content.
Always prioritize lower specificity over other factors. Most style definitions should consist of a single element or css selector plus necessary state modifiers. Avoid SCSS nesting for the sake of code organization. This will allow users to much more easily override styles.
For example, rather than doing this:
md-calendar {
display: block;
.md-month {
display: inline-block;
.md-date.md-selected {
font-weight: bold;
}
}
}
do this:
md-calendar {
display: block;
}
.md-calendar-month {
display: inline-block;
}
.md-calendar-date.md-selected {
font-weight: bold;
}
The end-user of a component should be the one to decide how much margin a component has around it.
This makes it easier to override styles when necessary. For example, rather than
:host {
// ...
.some-child-element {
color: red;
}
}
you can write
:host {
// ...
color: red;
}
The latter is equivalent for the component, but makes it easier override when necessary.
This is a low-effort task that makes a big difference for low-vision users. Example:
@media screen and (-ms-high-contrast: active) {
.unicorn-motocycle {
border: 1px solid #fff !important;
}
}
When it is not super obvious, include a brief description of what a class represents. For example:
// The calendar icon button used to open the calendar pane.
.md-datepicker-button { ... }
// Floating pane that contains the calendar at the bottom of the input.
.md-datepicker-calendar-pane { ... }
// Portion of the floating panel that sits, invisibly, on top of the input.
.md-datepicker-input-mask { }